– Detention and fines – Port State Control officers increasingly classify oily bilges as a detainable deficiency. Illegal discharge of bilges may subject the vessel to heavy fines and the potential for the crew to face charges, including imprisonment.
– Machinery breakdown – Various leakages in the machinery, pipelines and valves may be signs of poor maintenance or an inherent failure which may lead to machinery/equipment breakdown.
Best Practices
– Engine room bilges should always be kept clean and free of oil. – Engine room bilges should be painted in a light colour to visually assist in identifying a fresh leak.
– Chemical cleaning should be carried out periodically. On vessels fitted with an Oily Water Separator (OWS), the chemical used should be confirmed as compatible.
– Any identified source of any oily water in the bilge should be thoroughly investigated.
– Machinery, equipment, pipelines and valves should be periodically inspected and maintained as per Planned Maintenance System (PMS) and Manufacturer’s Instructions.
– The OWS overboard discharge valve should be secured in the closed position with an appropriate notice clearly posted to warn against unauthorised opening.
– Proper recordkeeping of the transfer, discharge, or disposal of bilge water should be maintained.
– The Safety Management System / ship-specific procedural system should allow for periodic checks on the engine room bilges and written procedures regarding oily bilge transfer and discharge operations.
NEW EMSA CARGOSAFE STUDY INVESTIGATES RISKS FROM CARGO FIRES
Based on a safety risk study on containerized cargo fires, the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has released the CARGOSAFE study, with the goal of identifying cost-effective risk control options for cargo fires. It assesses the dimensions of the problem for both existing ships and newbuilds.
The CARGOSAFE study examines the risks associated with fires on container ships and evaluates measures to control these risks in terms of prevention, detection, firefighting, and containment. CARGOSAFE follows the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) structure for use in IMO rule-making process. A dedicated risk model has been developed to assess the risks for the loss of life, cargo, ship, environment, and salvage. Finally, the study presents the results of a cost-effectiveness assessment (CEA) of the identified Risk Control Options (RCOs) for three generic ship types (feeder, twin island, single island).
Definition of the problem The high-risk areas which need to be addressed according with each protection layer are:
– Prevention: reduce the fire occurrence, particularly in relation to the misdeclaration/undeclaration or dangerous cargo. – Detection: detected sufficiently early to try a local extinguishment by crew or release a first shot of extinguishing agent. – Firefighting: extinguishing or at least control the fire in the hold of origin for a long period of time. – Containment: control the fire at the bay of origin or the bay above the hold of origin.
Fires on containerships, in particular originating in containers, have gained increasing visibility in the last five years, even though cargo fires are already a known characteristic accident occurrence for such ship types. The increased attention to cargo fire accidents is well aligned with an increase in the size of these ships, with a fleet which has seen a close to 30% capacity increase in the VLCS and ULCS categories over the last two years.
Download the study at
https://bit.ly/3KcAow7. Or scan the QR code.
36 | The Report • June 2023 • Issue 104
Safety Briefings
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144
